re: True/False: High Level Strategy Edition

quote:

---

Bama's obsession with beating LSU (and the resulting schematic and personnel decisions) has left them extremely vulnerable to others.

---

Not sure if this is meant to be a flame, or serious, but:

I think so. Bama's built to be big and physical, and win low-scoring, defensive matchups. Stop the power run, run the ball with power themselves, and throw on play-action after the run is working.

Teams that suck you into shootouts (Oklahoma last night, A&M twice, Auburn in the Iron Bowl) expose them. Hard-hitting run support defenders like Mosley and the rest, they become irrelevant against spread teams. Defensively you have to play basically a nickel base (which is what LSU does, and why it has been more successful against that style), so the featured players on defense either ride the bench, or are chasing faster guys in space. Either way, the Bama edge is negated.

Offensively, there's so much emphasis on power in the lineup, the passing game suffers. Sure, you get play-action; but when forced to go straight shotgun, your linemen (who excel at run blocking) are exposed against smaller, more agile ends. There's not enough variety in the passing (or tempo) game, so you run out of plays to run. You end up showing the same plays, and defenses pick up on things and cover it better.

I also think that all of Bama's late defensive checks from the sidelines cause a lot of confusion when the opposing team is going fast. Lots, and lots of motion, and quick to the line teams leave Bama coaches having spasms on the sidelines trying to adjust Bama's scheme.

They out-athlete everyone, I don't understand why they don't just simplify a little for these type schemes.

a late response;

quote:

---

I also think that all of Bama's late defensive checks from the sidelines cause a lot of confusion when the opposing team is going fast.

---

quote:

---

They out-athlete everyone, I don't understand why they don't just simplify a little for these type schemes

---

Because Nick is into total control. Simplifying things would relinquish that control; it then places the game in the hands of the players.

Saban might have the best physical specimens on the field, but they might not be the smartest (not saying that, I really don't know). If that's the case, then what is a dominant team with time to line up and call plays and adjustments, becomes a disaster when they have to figure out what to do themselves against a no-huddle. Even if they aren't dummies, being reliant on sideline guidance most of the time will have an effect when they do have to cut the cord against teams moving fast.